Laserfiche WebLink
Motion by Councilmember Cisneros, seconded by Councilman Roman, to accept and <br />approve the Consent Calendar. Unanimous vote. <br />CLOSED SESSION: <br />The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 7:55 P. M., to discuss pending <br />litigation, pursuant to Government Code Section 5496.9(a) and Personnel Matters <br />pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. The Council reconvened at 8:19 P. <br />M., all Members present. <br />As Councilman Roman must leave, Item 16 is now advanced on the Agenda, with <br />approval of the Councilmembers. <br />PUBLIC HEARING: <br />Revised Zoning Ordinance <br />Mayor Gonzales declared the Public Hearing open. <br />City Clerk Ramos submitted the Affidavit of Publication and reported no protests or <br />objections were received. <br />Community Development Director Aguilera summarized the efforts expended in <br />compilation of the proposed Zoning Ordinance. This subject had been continued from <br />the prior meeting to allow the City Council to review the Ordinance item relating to <br />signage. Mr. Aguilera stated that the City Attorney incorporated changes to Section <br />18.50.040, allowing the existing signs to be governed by the existing ordinance and <br />future signs to be governed by the new Ordinance. The Planning Commission and <br />Staff recommended waiving full reading and passing First Reading of the proposed <br />ordinance. <br />Mr. Fred Cordova, 1090 West E Street, voiced concern as to the Ordinance section <br />dealing with recreational vehicles where the owner can be cited if the motorhome or <br />boat can be seen from the street. He pointed out that most recreational vehicles are <br />huge and cannot be hidden. He knew that the City would not allow the homeowner <br />to erect a 16 -feet high fence. The suggestion that the recreational vehicle can be <br />taken to a storage lot fails as storage lots have no security and the recreational vehicle <br />could easily be vandalized and/or stolen. Mayor Gonzales agreed that this Ordinance <br />section is too restrictive. Mr. Cordova stated that he would not object if a <br />recreational vehicle could be seen from the street. <br />3 <br />JUN 2 1992 <br />